Missing Wharries

[SarahND]

Was that a birth or Christening for the 04 of October

It was a birth.

Karen that post wasn't there when I started typing my post but was there when I posted it. Never had that happen before. Maybe I'm too slow a typist.

It happens to me all the time And you're not a slow typist, it's just that I make my notes on a word-processing program, put together the message, then copy and paste... All over in a few seconds! Unfortunately, there is nothing that tells whether or not someone else has a posting window open at the same time!

All the best,
Sarah

[dollard]

I checked those 3 deaths and none are the missing son.

doing a free search on SP again there is 2 George ADAMS and 1 George ADAM dying in 1871. Was that a birth or Christening for the 04 of October?

Anyway, one of them could be the missing son.

Karen

[dollard]

I've sent off a summary of your (various people on this forum) brilliant detective work to the lady in Australia. I'm not sure when I will hear back. I guess she doesn't have as much free time as the rest of us and it takes her longer to respond.

[Currie]

Hello Dollard,

Not having Australian census info isn’t as bad as it sounds, at least not in New South Wales where I am. In fact if all those census returns suddenly reappeared they probably wouldn’t add much to what I already know.

Have you seen the National Archives of Australia site? If you search for Wharrie as a keyword you’ll find some born Scotland. http://naa12.naa.gov.au/scripts/ResearcherScreen.asp

Alan

[dollard]

Thanks Alan. I had not seen that site. I'm not sure if any of them are connected to the family I have been looking at but I will leave that up to the lady in Australia that I am doing this for. I think she has checked many of them.
But I did find one of my Wharries (which don't seem to be connected to the ones we have been looking at here) there. From a Glasgow will I knew one went there sometime and I see him as a soldier there in WW I.

[dollard]

As she can see from below the Australian lady was quite impressed what you all found about her Wharrie "ancestors".

"Yahooo, I am jumping up and down in my seat - yes, I knew it was going to be something like this. You are a champion to find this all out. I am so excitied, my daughter Sarah, who is sitting having breakfast with me, thinks I've gone a bit mad!!
This is all what I thought - but you have been able to connect all the dots with what you have found out. Now I will go and read your first email.
What a wonderful Christmas gift this is - this has been years in the waiting."

She suspected something like this as there were a number of odd things that now all make sense.
She had a couple of questions that maybe somone could help me with.
On page 2 Jean said;
"3. If this Robert Wharrie married again it would have been a situation of bigamy. Knowing this he may have opted for an irregular marriage and they just never had it recorded. An irregular marriage would have been perfectly legal even if it never were registered....but NOT perfectly legal if in fact Robert was still legally wed to another woman. That being the case Robert and Mary Ann may have simply stated they were married. No one would have required proof of their marriage in order to register the birth of a child or their own death." She wonders if she could have farther explanation of this practice.
On page 3 Sarah wrote;
"1871
?? Elliot Street, Anderston, Glasgow Barony, Lanarkshire
George Adams, 44, Head, born Ireland, Master Marine *Hansmployger*
Mary Ann Adams, 24, Wife, born Anderson, Aryshire
George Adams, 12, Son, born Anderson, Aryshire, Message Boy"
She wonders, as a few of us do, what the occupation Master Marine HANSMPLOYGER could be. I have tried many times to find this same entry on Scotlandspeople to see the census entry but this family doesn't come on a search using those details. Something wrong with the SP indexing. Any suggestions?

[JustJean]

Hi dollard

I can throw out my two cents worth by way of explaining.....First I'll start with part 2 which is the easy bit!! Yes George and family are found on the SP 1871 census index and yes there is a fairly decent image of that page. The trick is how they are indexed...gotta go for them wildcards!!!!! I must admit that I just don't see the "E" but an "S" instead...

Just search for him like this...

1871 ADAME GEORGE M 44 ANDERSTON GLASGOW/LANARK 644/08 080/08 021

Now for that occupation...well..when you have a peek at the image you'll have no prob reading it for yourself. That is one area that Ancestry sadly really falls down hard on.

Now for part 1 and what I was trying to impart in my first posting regarding possible scenarios for a marriage. We can't know what was in tne minds of these individuals and what their motivation was. If we knew that then it would be much easier to predict just what really did occur. Since the statutory records and the census records indicate that Robert WHARRIE was legally married to Margaret and she is found living alone on two census records but stating she was married and using the surname WHARRIE it would be safe to assume she thought of herself as married. Lacking any children I think if she had been divorced then she would have happily returned to using her maiden name or even her first married name. However...if her husband walked on her and she didn't know his whereabouts then she might have been inclined to carry on with no changes. Why bother with divorce proceedings or even having him declared dead....unless she found someone else she wanted to marry. Which makes me really really wonder where she disappears to.

Now for the real culprits here.... Robert and Mary Ann. If they met in Scotland then maybe Mary Ann knew about Margaret. If they didn't meet until they were in Australia....which is actually looking possible.....then maybe she never knew that Robert WHARRIE already had a wife. It sure looks like John was not the real son of Robert WHARRIE...but then again...maybe he was...but the statutory records indicate otherwise. So we know for sure something is not quite right but we don't know just how wrong it was As for irregular marriages. That really has no direct bearing on the validity of a marriage between Robert WHARRIE and Mary Ann. Irregular marriage is a topic that has been covereed any number of times in quite some detail on this forum and others. A nicely comprehensive article appeared in 2004 and is in the Ancestry.com library. Here's a link http://www.ancestry.com/learn/library/a ... ticle=8397

I hope this helps....and I hope what my reply lacks someone will graciously step in and fill in.

Best wishes
Jean

[dollard]

Thanks Jean.
Master Marine unemployed. I wouldn't have guessed.
It is interesting that you say Robert and Mary Anne may have met in Australia as the Australian lady suggested the same. Suggested it may be the reason we couldn't find Mary Anne's husband George Adams and his son George on later census in Scotland-they left the country also.

[JustJean]

Thanks Jean.
Master Marine unemployed. I wouldn't have guessed.
It is interesting that you say Robert and Mary Anne may have met in Australia as the Australian lady suggested the same. Suggested it may be the reason we couldn't find Mary Anne's husband George Adams and his son George on later census in Scotland-they left the country also.

Yup....the missing George as well as his first marriage kids missing too.....surely makes me wonder if they all packed their trunks and sailed away. Perhaps he died in Australia and left Mary Ann with a young son and she then took up with Robert and carried on. I guess if I were writing the script that's the version I'd go with.......as for what really happened?....well...too bad Australia doesn't have some better records...it may always be a mystery....

Best wishes
Jean